and that is a very plain one and one would imagine beyond exception 'T is St. Stephen praying in these words Lord Jesus receive my Spirit Act. 7. 59. but behold the fineness of Fr. Davids Invention saith he 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be either the Genetive or the Vocative Case according to the usual art of Socinian reasoning it must be taken in that sence that will best serve a Turn tho' never so alien or contrary to the true interpretation and the Reason of the Context he must have it Lord of Jesus or else it will prove either that 't is Lawful to Worship our Saviour and to pray unto him or this first Martyr died with Idolatry in his mouth But this Criticism is not so fine as 't is forced and absurd The Learned observe that if Jesus had been the Genitive Case the Article would have been added 't would have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We find the same words Rev. 22. 20. and there they cannot bear the sence of the Genitive and must be understood in the Vocative Case But besides the ilness of the Grammer the harshness of the Sence and the Novelty of this rare discovery two or three things might abate the Authors confident boasting of this Invention The Syriac is beyond the reach of it Domine Noster Jesu Some Copies have it plainer yet and Read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Lord Christ And their admired Grotius's gloss is utterly inconsistent with it Invocantem nempe Jesum Christum But why should I trouble my Reader any farther about this Ridiculous shift of David which you may find was long since exposed and baffled by Socinus himself in a very strenuous confutation of it which its Author David had never courage or skill enough to encounter again that I can find Now my Brethren consider 't is eternal Reason that Reliously to Worship any Creature is Idolatry but we have found it the common practice of the best men in Scripture thus Religiously to Worship our Saviour Christ it seems to follow clearly that either these Holy Men so doing were Idolaters or our Saviour Christ is more then a meer Creature that is he is the True God I know you will deny the First I heartily wish you would confess the Second it would be so far well betwixt us However you do not undertake to defend the part of Socinus from Idolatry more haynous then that of the Papists which I hope I have demonstrated sufficiently before CHAP. II. The Socinians Antiscripturist as truly as if not more then the Papists HAving ended our First Parrable betwixt the Socinian and Papist with respect to the Term of Worship we come next to compare them with respect to their Rule of Faith the Canonical Books of the Holy Scriptures Herein also they both concur viz. In their endeavours to undermine their Authority And when they think they have occasion so to do they lay this Rule aside and set up another of their own in the stead of it That the Papists do so the Socinians readily grant and that the Socians do like the Papists and exceed them therein is as easily demonstrated SECT I. The Papists vilifies the Holy Scripture 1. FOR the Papists the World is sensible enough how vilely they deal with this Rule of the Holy Scriptures and make them indeed as they sometimes call them A Nose of Wax and a Leaden Rule They take upon them to sence them as they please and use them only as Tools to serve a turn and little otherwise Sometimes they will admit nothing but the bare Words without any reasonable Construction of them when they would advance their Transubstantiation At other times when the proper and Litteral Sence is against them O then the Scripture is a Killing a Dead Letter and must receive its Life and Sense from their Churches Interpretation how wild and absurd soever it be to serve their Hypothesis Thus when they have disparaged sleighted and set aside the True Rule 't is no wonder they introduce and obtrude another Rule of their own devising which they do not only make equal with it but prefer before it I mean their Oral Tradition and the Authority of the Roman Church Yea when they seem to allow the Holy Scriptures any Authority they at the same time rob them of it by transfering that Authority to themselves their own Sence and Sentiments tho' diverse from and even contrary to the Letter or plain and obvious meaning of the Written Word SECT II. The Socinians vilifie the Scripture more then Papists WHile I have been speaking of the Papist I have given you but an imperfect draught and Character of a Socinian in this point Verily the Papist seems to be the honester of the two His is an open and down-right attacking and villifying those Holy Books while the Socinian doth it in disguise and wounds it deeper lies in its Bosom and stabbs it to the Heart and with splended Colours of Honouring and Arguments proving its Divine Original and Authority makes it utter Non-sense bad sense or any sence that their cause requires Now seeing these men in other things are Masters of a great deal of Reason it may be worth a Question whether their Writing so much for the Divine Authority of the Holy Scriptures be from a real Opinion of the Truth of it or only in pretence to serve their own purpose and varnish their designs For how is it possible if their Opinion of it were Real they should use it so slightly and after so trifling a manner as 't is pitty to see they do With how much gravity and solemn circumstances do they make the Word of God Felo de se not so much by opposing as by Apposing one part to another and by the idlest Phansies or an odd kind of skill peculiar to themselves make a weaker text take off the life and sense of a Stronger and by a likeness or sameness or neerness of expression when there is no other reason in the World for it to enervate the strength of the best Arguments it affords for the God-head of Christ and the Sacred Trinity To make this out beyond exception give me leave only to mention some Instances of it The mention only is shame and reproach enough one would think as well as confutation in the sense of an Indifferent or modest Man 1. When we prove Three Persons and each of them God from the great Commission for Propagating the Christian Church by Baptising in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost They gravely answer and would have us take it for a full Answer That 't is said the Israelites were Baptized into Moses and in the Cloud and that they believed in God and his Servant Moses 2. When we urge John 1. 1. In the beginning was the Word they reply that it must signifie the Beginning of the Gospel or New Creation And their
A PARALLEL Wherein it appears that the SOCINIAN Agrees with the PAPIST If not exceeds him in Idolatry Antiscripturism and Fanaticism By FRANCIS FVLLWOOD D. D. and Arch-deacon of Totness in Devon Thinkest thou this O man that judgest them which do such things and dost the same that thou shalt escape Rom. 2. 3. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Rom. 14. 22. IMPRIMATUR May 16. 1693. R. Barker London Printed for A. and J. Churchill at the Black Swan in Pater-Noster-Row 1693. TO THE Most Reverend Father in God JOHN LORD Arch-Bishop of Canterbury And Primate of all ENGLAND FRANCIS FVLLWOOD Presumes with all Humility to Dedicate this following short Discourse touching Socinianism c. IT would be an unpardonable vanity in me to imagine either that the World needed my Observation how Seasonable and highly Acceptable His GRACE's late Vindication of our Lord's Divinity and Incarnation was or my Recommendation of it could I find words worthy to do it Yet thus much I cannot forbear to utter that 't is a Rare thing to find such Condescention such Candour and such Charity even towards the Enemies of our Common Faith as well as to Friends of it in a person of the Highest Station Whereby indeed he shews himself forth as an Eminent Head not only Adorning but Influencing and Animating by an admirable example the great Body of our Church under him If I may presume to speak my mind in a few words more the strength of Reason is so dextrously managed in those four Excellent and Incomparable Sermons that it will not be easie to answer them the two former of them have driven both the Arian and Socinian Reason to palpable Non-sence And the Two latter have given the World so reasonable and satisfactory account of the Christian Oeconomy that all their idle Ideas and imaginary pretences to the contrary are Deaded at the Root and put to silence in the Grave without hope of a Resurrection at least in the same Body The World is a sensible Witness of the truth of this to which I was provoked by the strange assurance of some amongst us having no farther design in it then the Publick advantage no not so much as to gain his GRACE's Countenance and Protection of this small Pamphlet the usual pretence of such Dedications But I most humbly beg His GRACE's pardon for the boldness of it and pray heartily that GOD would long preserve His Person and succeed all His Excellent Endeavours in the Government and for the good of this Poor Church Litton near Dorchester April 25. 1693. TO THE READER VVHAT I have charged the Socinians with viz That they are equally guilty of Idolatry Antiscripturism and Fanaticism with the Papist if not more hainously is no more then what their Learned Adversaries do generally twit them with They have indeed done it obitèr or more by the by and I have more largely undertaken to prove it upon them in the following Sheets The SOCINIAN stands Indited here of those three great Offences in Religion and methinks 't is but reasonable to expect he should answer to this Charge before he proceeds any farther to disturb our Common Faith with his novel and nice Disputes and Quarrels about particular Points If he think himself concern'd so to do I would advise him to begin with the First Article of the Inditement and clear himself and his Cause from Idolatry in the sence we charge it upon the Church of Rome More plainly That he would Consider and Speak out unto these two Propositions viz. ' That to give the Worship due to the Supream God to a Creature is Idolatry 2ly That 't is Lawful and therefore no Idolatry to give the Worship due to the Supream God to Jesus Christ These two Propositions divide the Vnitarians as they call themselves into Two Parties One of them affirms the First and the other the Second as I have observed and in my Opinion both of them do their parts against each other unanswerably And if both be found so far in the right I hope neither of them will see Cause to deny the Conclusion That then Jesus Christ is more then a mere Creature that is the same with the Supream God However if any think themselves engag'd to persist in the denial of either of those Two Propositions for the saving of their Cause when we hear what they can say I doubt not but they will have a farther and a fuller Answer if need be The Good Spirit lead us into all Truth THE INTRODUCTION The Design Stated and brought to an Issue THE SOCINIAN values himself much for his Opposition to Popery and indeed some of that Name have managed it in many considerable Articles with great Reason and Merit and were I such an Unitarian as he pretends to be I should esteem it more agreeable and less Scandalous to be called a Jew or a Turk or an Infidel than so bad a Christian as the Papist is But the Socinian hath one very dear and darling Opinion and is a Man of so much Reason and Resolution that if Reason in the Service of his Hypothesis require it he seems not to stick at any thing tho' it savour never so rankly even of Popery it self Yea tho' the things themselves abstractedly considered are the Objects of his professed Hatred and Detestation And though they bear the burthen of the Socinian charge against Popery and tho' he upbraids the Protestant with some degrees of the same guilt yet when the grossest of those things appear necessary for the Maintenance of his Cause the Popery vanisheth the Opposition ceaseth and with great Friendship the things otherwise detested are entertained and embraced are openly professed and practiced and pleaded for with all imaginable Reason and Zeal Now That I may justifie what I have said 't is observable that there are three small Peccadilloes which lie pretty near the Root and Essence of the Papacy in the Judgment of the Socinians themselves wherein for the state of their Cause no doubt they do plainly Symbolize with if not out-do the very Jesuit These have respect to the Term of their Worship the Rule of their Faith And Lastly the very Foundation of their Religion and are no less or greater than Idolatry Antiscripturism and Fanatical Enthusiasm In short my present charge upon the Socinian is this that he agrees with and even goes beyond the Papist in all these viz. Idolatry Antiscripturism and Fanaticism or Enthusiasm all which in the three Chapters following I shall endeavour to prove and demonstrate in a fair and just Comparison betwixt them which is all my present intention and business For I must leave the Merits of the Socinian Cause at large to the Vndertaking promised by the Excellent and Learned Dean of St. Pauls who the World knows will perform it throughly and effectually and earnestly desires and expects it CHAP. I. The Socinian compared with the Papist in point of Idolatry
Papists do but they do not The plain truth seems to be this the Holy Scriptures abound with Arguments for the Worshipping of Christ as God so glaring he could not outface them tho' herein Socinus seems evidently to deny his own Reason in reverence to Revelation which is rare in him and to destroy his own dear Hypothesis as well as confute his Adversary For while he allows truely Religious Worship to be given to our Saviour he thereby grants him to be more than a Creature that is the Supream God both in the Reason of the thing the natural Consequence of his Concession and in the just sentence of the other Socinian Party I mean Fr. David and his Adherents Here I crave leave to fix my foot and with these other kind of Unitarians I do affirm and am provided to maintain if need be that Socinus and his Followers must either acknowour Saviour to be more then a Creature and become an Orthodox Christian in this point or that they are Idolaters in a more Scandalous manner then the Papists seeing they make to themselves a God of a Creature by ascribing the Worship due to the Supream to their Creature-God and seeing they professedly Worship Two Gods let them no longer glory in the Name of Unitarians but leave it for Turks and Jews who better deserve it But I must beg leave to digress a little on Socinus's part who hath as effectually baffled Francis David by clear Scripture Proof that our Saviour is to be Religiously Worship'd as the said David was too hard for Socinus in the other point that our Saviour being supposed to be a meer Creature it is Idolatry so to Worship him and if he ought so to be Worshipped he is more then a Creature i. e. Truly a God I find this Argument hath put some to second thoughts they begin to startle and are afraid of Idolatry And therefore say that some Unitarians are contrary minded and believe our Saviour ought not to be Religiously Worshipped and Adored as God And this is the side to which they seem now to lean for fear of Idolatry 'T is for the sake of these chiefly that I desire to dilate a little about this great Article and I earnestly beseech them seriously to weigh a few things before they determine themselves in it First You change sides for the worse You leave your Master Socinus who was certainly more like a Christian and cleave to David and his party that are more open and desperate Enemies of our Lord and Saviour Secondly You lean to a Party that brandeth the first and great founder of Socinianism with gross Idolatry and to avoid Idolatry by giving Christ more than you think is due you come within the peril of Sacriledge and rob him of that which is of right due to him Thirdly Consider if it do appear that Christ ought to be Religious Adored and Worshipped the Consequence is irresistible in Francis Davids Judgment as well as in the thing it self We cannot saith he Adore the Son unless we suppose Christ to be in the Father and the Father in Christ Unitate Essentiae by unity of Essence Fourthly and Lastly Seriously consider the Arguments of Socinus himself and we need no other before you leave him in so great a point wherein he is certainly in the right that Christ ought to be Religiously Adored and Worshipped what ever the consequence may be Seeing you incline to believe that David's point is well fixed and that Religiously to Adore and Worship any Creature is Idolatry as we have all along maintained If Socinus make good his point too That Christ is to be Religiously Adored and Worshipped let the Orthodox truth find its way by these lights and preserve or recover its place in our Faith as good Christians touching our Saviours Divinity SECT V. Socinus and his Parties Arguments that Christ is to be Religiously Worshipped LET us now take a brief Survey of Socinus and his parties Arguments to prove that we may and ought to give Religious Adoration and Worship to our Saviour They do it sufficiently under these Three Heads Profit Necessity and Example 1. 'T is our Interest and consequently our Wisdom thus to 1. Profit Worship him The Rac. Catechis teacheth That We should believe that Christ is able to do all things and that if we seek his S. 6. C. 1. L. 88. 89. favour he will do us good and perform all his promises to us and infer thence that We ought to trust in Christ in the same manner as we ought to trust in God Again they say We may direct our Prayers to him in all our necessities because he both can and will help us and he understands our Prayers 2. 'T is our necessary Duty both with respect to his Person and 2. Necessity the Law of his Father Socinus himself infers a necessity of Praying to Christ because of the Kingdom Power and Government given to him as before we observed And in the Law of Blands Tom. 2. p. 716 721. the Gospel to pray to Christ is made the very Condition of Salvation Socinus acknowledgeth against Fr. David that passage in the Prophet Joel 2. 32. Whosoever shall call on the Name of the Lord shall be saved is justly applied to Christ by the Apostle in Rom. 10. 13. Yea this is the very Character the Holy Scriptures give us of a Christian he is one that calls on the Name of Christ Act. 14. 9. 1 Cor. 1. 2. 2 Tim. 2. 22. and their own Catechism asserts peremptorily as we noted before that they are no Christians that will not pray to Christ who tell us plainly and expresly that 't is our Duty to Worship him and prove it from Joh. 5. 22 23. All should honour the Son as they honour the Father 3. Their Catechism assures us that we may pray unto Christ because Examples p. 89. we have several Instances of Holy Men who have done so His own Disciples prayed unto him when he was upon the Earth for Temporal deliverance Lord save us we perish Matth. 8. 25. And even for Spiritual Grace Lord increase our Faith And after he was gone to Heaven St. Paul the great Apostle of the Gentiles that disputed so effectually against Pagan Idolatry pray'd unto him more then once I saith he besought the Lord thrice and his Lord assured him he did well in so doing in this gracious answer My grace is sufficient for thee 2 Cor. 10. 7 8 9. So far Socinus himself his followers further observe that the same Apostle joyns Christ with God the Father in his prayer mentioned to the Thessalonians Now God himself and our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ direct our way unto you and at other times does the same in effect in his Salutations to the several Churches when he wisheth them Grace Mercy and Peace equally from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ These instances I hope are sufficient I shall add one more